Unresponsive VVS.

[tcolvin]

You may be right, Igor, that Triandafillov invented deep operation theory, but this does not appear to be Simpkin's view (page 36);

"One at first gets the impression that, about 1931, this development took a sudden ninety-degree turn from 'broad' to 'deep', in tune with Triandafillov's 'second stage of development'.......... That this impression of a sudden change of direction may be wrong is largely due to the tendency of some Soviet writers to confuse 'deep battle' and 'deep operation'. In fact so eminent an authority as Losik at one point writes of ".....the deep battle, more correctly called deep operation theory". As we shall see, the 'deep battle' at tactical level was a first stage in the evolution of the 'deepening idea', leading to 'deep operation theory' and thence towards a 'theory of operational defence'. Isserson confirms this by stressing that the elements of the deep battle concept are reflected in the 1929 Field Service Regulations".

I do not, however, dispute your view because I do not speak Russian and must rely on secondary sources like Simpkin and his translation of the originals, and on you and others of course.

It might interest you, though, to know how Simpkin described the relationship between Tukhachevskii and Triandafillov (page 32);

"The intellectual relationship between T & T was a complex one. In effect Triandafillov the thinker was sandwiched between Tukhachevskii the dreamer, lover of the arts and of beautiful women, and Tukhachevskii the man of action. Isserson highlights the 'sweep of Tukhachevskii's operational thinking' and his intense technological awareness, and tells us that Triandafillov 'concretised' Tukhachevskii's ideas, thus allowing the latter to implement them".

This is slightly reminiscent of the relationship between Slessor and Trenchard, or even more slightly that between Coram and 'Forty-Second Boyd', in that the thinking of Trenchard and Boyd are known to us through others.

Finally, perhaps you would be good enough to comment on Six Nifty's interesting suggestion that a third reason for the unresponsiveness of the VVS and of the artillery arm could have been the backward state of Russian radio technology.

Tony